Delivered-To: john.podesta@gmail.com
Received: by 10.140.48.99 with SMTP id n90csp125863qga;
Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:06:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.52.35.81 with SMTP id f17mr15051069vdj.13.1406052413965;
Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:06:53 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path:
Received: from mail-vc0-f198.google.com (mail-vc0-f198.google.com [209.85.220.198])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e5si1981687vcz.37.2014.07.22.11.06.53
for
(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:06:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: none (google.com: ctrfriendsfamily+bncBCR43OXH6EGBBOOQXKPAKGQE7J7M4AI@americanbridge.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=209.85.192.41;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
spf=neutral (google.com: ctrfriendsfamily+bncBCR43OXH6EGBBOOQXKPAKGQE7J7M4AI@americanbridge.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=ctrfriendsfamily+bncBCR43OXH6EGBBOOQXKPAKGQE7J7M4AI@americanbridge.org
Received: by mail-vc0-f198.google.com with SMTP id hu12sf47779vcb.9
for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:06:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:date:message-id:subject:from
:to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:precedence
:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive
:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type;
bh=+Z5Ha0T+4O1RybBO6DNQ8ZkGJC6VtEBdwzFtyX2BfWs=;
b=jLOUY7f+k/5IyVFqYEirp7QY7jnyQy6SB4Mih6Xdj9IeWNqIgVP/64uQoT2l1LWQho
yqCEN+NbSqkBQM6k1aQzWwiNIQtLAfYZzqheQ9nBxFXn1WYRFqdvoX3BdiCcqDlE4deL
31hF47UHSqrRwM6B8G3TltbK+fC3Wl/HKrFU4UyfIL7axg2vR4b1Vs3CU/obfUTl3dQX
a0/Kpm5c4/LVLHljZFihqKWQAOALJ3jITyflWF8jDeWV/n8unXlToZAQPnVFCsg2j3Ac
g9bpN5GP4m/hC5irDBoaLW1awUx8d+dX8Jr13/1YCOxdg14q3x/Ld0q08nWAiQXmdeKS
BZeg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmuiaeoZqHGg7LYHsND8oKXe+Eo4/tyvz6Jp+RrBDyiCtdEhMOCm+6d0J8s0jhFIriD88RK
X-Received: by 10.236.26.206 with SMTP id c54mr14975393yha.44.1406052410009;
Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:06:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: ctrfriendsfamily@americanbridge.org
Received: by 10.140.47.174 with SMTP id m43ls2145qga.84.gmail; Tue, 22 Jul
2014 11:06:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.224.16.212 with SMTP id p20mr60185917qaa.1.1406052409457;
Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:06:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qg0-f41.google.com (mail-qg0-f41.google.com [209.85.192.41])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a6si2133743qam.0.2014.07.22.11.06.49
for
(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:06:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: none (google.com: burns.strider@americanbridge.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=209.85.192.41;
Received: by mail-qg0-f41.google.com with SMTP id q107so23133qgd.28
for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:06:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.224.120.68 with SMTP id c4mr58753179qar.17.1406052409159;
Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:06:49 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: jchurch@americanbridge.org
X-Google-Sender-Delegation: jchurch@americanbridge.org
Received: by 10.140.104.116 with HTTP; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:06:48 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 14:06:48 -0400
Message-ID:
Subject: Correct The Record Tuesday July 22, 2014 Afternoon Roundup
From: Burns Strider
To: CTRFriendsFamily
X-Original-Sender: burns.strider@americanbridge.org
X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral
(google.com: burns.strider@americanbridge.org does not designate permitted
sender hosts) smtp.mail=burns.strider@americanbridge.org
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list CTRFriendsFamily@americanbridge.org; contact CTRFriendsFamily+owners@americanbridge.org
List-ID:
X-Google-Group-Id: 1010994788769
List-Post: ,
List-Help: ,
List-Archive:
List-Subscribe: ,
List-Unsubscribe: ,
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary=001a11c305806280c804fecc162e
--001a11c305806280c804fecc162e
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c305806280c604fecc162d
--001a11c305806280c604fecc162d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
*[image: Inline image 1]*
*Correct The Record Tuesday July 22, 2014 Afternoon Roundup:*
*Tweets:*
*Sec. Hillary Rodham Clinton* @HillaryClinton: On my way to @Twitter! Tweet
your questions to me with #AskHillary & watch my conversation with @KatieS
here:http://youtu.be/kcMbpeRINZc [7/21/14, 7:30
p.m. EDT ]
*Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: .@HillaryClinton calls for additional
sanctions on Russia, working with our European allies.
http://thehill.com/policy/international/212896-clinton-calls-for-tougher-sa=
nctions-on-putin
=E2=80=A6
[7/22/14, 1:15 p.m. EDT
]
*Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: See what @HillaryClinton thinks is one
of the biggest problems facing our country right now #AskHillary
http://youtu.be/wHy-z_zxnYc [7/22/14, 12:39 p.m.
EDT ]
*Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: .@AmericaRising What is it you dislike
more about charity, helping people or helping people? #AskRising [7/21/14, =
5:59
p.m. EDT ]
*Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: Why the =E2=80=98rich Hillary Clinton=
=E2=80=99
storyline is so dumb
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/07/21/why-the-rich-hi=
llary-clinton-storyline-is-so-dumb/
=E2=80=A6
via @paulwaldman1 [7/21/14, 4:23 p.m. EDT
]
*Headlines:*
*CNN: =E2=80=9CRubio calls Clinton 'a 20th century candidate'=E2=80=9D
*
=E2=80=9C=E2=80=98Should she decide to run for president, Hillary Clinton w=
ould present a
forward-thinking agenda, one that presents new, bold ideas to keep our
country moving in the right direction. With his history supporting the Tea
Party=E2=80=99s outdated, regressive policies, Senator Rubio is the one stu=
ck in
the stone ages. This is nothing but a desperate attempt by him to divert
from his failed legislative record,=E2=80=99 Adrienne Elrod, communications
director at the pro-Clinton rapid response shop Correct The Record, told
CNN.=E2=80=9D
*Washington Post blog: Post Politics: =E2=80=9CMarco Rubio calls Hillary Cl=
inton a
=E2=80=9820th century candidate=E2=80=99=E2=80=9D
*
=E2=80=9CAdrienne Elrod, communications director for Correct the Record, a
pro-Clinton super PAC, responded in a statement: =E2=80=98Should she decide=
to run
for president, Hillary Clinton would present a forward-thinking agenda, one
that presents new, bold ideas to keep our country moving in the right
direction.=E2=80=99=E2=80=9D
*Media Matters for America: =E2=80=9CWhen A GOP Presidential Hopeful Earned=
$11
Million In Speaking Fees And D.C. Press Didn't Care=E2=80=9D
*
=E2=80=9CEven though the Republican hopeful in thirteen months prior to his
candidacy earned nearly twice as much money in speaking fees as Clinton has
in the sixteen months since stepping down as Secretary of State, the press
has universally agreed that Clinton's fee are not only newsworthy but
deeply disturbing and that her family wealth poses a =E2=80=98a political
liability.=E2=80=99=E2=80=9D
*Washington Post opinion: Catherine Rampell: =E2=80=9CLimousine liberalism=
=E2=80=99s good
works=E2=80=9D
=
*
=E2=80=9CThe term I=E2=80=99d use for a 1 percenter who expresses concern a=
bout the wages,
economic opportunities and safety nets available to the 99 percent is not
hypocrisy; it=E2=80=99s empathy.=E2=80=9D
*The Hill blog: Ballot Box: =E2=80=9CRubio: Clinton is =E2=80=9820th centur=
y candidate=E2=80=99=E2=80=9D
*
=E2=80=9CThe criticism of Clinton is =E2=80=98rich coming from a Senator wh=
o wants the
minimum wage to have less purchasing power than it did in the 1960=E2=80=99=
s, take
women=E2=80=99s health care back to the 1950=E2=80=99s, shut down the gover=
nment like
Republicans did in the 1990=E2=80=99s and has voted time and again to end M=
edicare
as we know it,=E2=80=99 Democratic National Committee nation press secretar=
y
Michael Czin said in an e-mail.=E2=80=9D
*Des Moines Register: =E2=80=9CPossible presidential rival to Hillary Clint=
on
coming to Iowa again=E2=80=9D
*
=E2=80=9CMaryland Gov. Martin O'Malley seems willing to fill the void in Io=
wa from
the relative lack of Democratic White House hopefuls touching base here.=E2=
=80=9D
*Slate: =E2=80=9CAdventures in Warrenland=E2=80=9D
*
=E2=80=9CThe evidence for a left-wing challenge to Clinton that could defea=
t her is
thin to nonexistent.=E2=80=9D
*Washington Examiner: =E2=80=9C'Lost control': MSNBC hits Hillary Clinton f=
or
wrecking her personal Image=E2=80=9D
*
=E2=80=9CFormer Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has =E2=80=98lost contro=
l=E2=80=99 of her public
Image, a sorry place to be for someone who's reportedly considering a 2016
presidential bid, and she has no one to blame but herself, an MSNBC panel
suggested Tuesday morning.=E2=80=9D
*Articles:*
*CNN: =E2=80=9CRubio calls Clinton 'a 20th century candidate'=E2=80=9D
*
By CNN Political Unit
July 22, 2014, 9:52 a.m. EDT
Marco Rubio's apparently not so concerned if Hillary Clinton decides to
make another run for the White House.
"I just think she's a 20th century candidate," the first-term senator from
Florida and potential 2016 GOP presidential candidate told NPR.
"I think she does not offer an agenda for moving America forward in the
21st century, at least not up till now," Rubio said, in an interview with
"Morning Edition" that posted early Tuesday.
"The truth of the matter is she was the secretary of state during an
administration that has had virtually no successes on foreign policy,"
Rubio added.
This is far from the first time Rubio's been critical of Clinton's tenure
as America's top diplomat.
"First, I think she's going to be asked to account for her time as
secretary of state and I don't think it's the sterling success people think
it is. Quite frankly, much of the foreign policy failures we see in place
today began when she ran the Department of State," Rubio told CNN's Wolf
Blitzer in an interview in February on "The Situation Room."
"Should she decide to run for president, Hillary Clinton would present a
forward-thinking agenda, one that presents new, bold ideas to keep our
country moving in the right direction. With his history supporting the Tea
Party=E2=80=99s outdated, regressive policies, Senator Rubio is the one stu=
ck in
the stone ages. This is nothing but a desperate attempt by him to divert
from his failed legislative record," Adrienne Elrod, communications
director at the pro-Clinton rapid response shop Correct The Record, told
CNN.
Clinton has said she'll decide on running for the White House by the end of
this year or early next year. Rubio, who's also up for re-election to the
Senate in 2016, said in the NPR interview that he'd make up his mind by
early 2015.
"There's a lot of work to be done if you're going to run for president, or
if you're going to run for re-election in a state as big as Florida," Rubio
added.
*Washington Post blog: Post Politics: =E2=80=9CMarco Rubio calls Hillary Cl=
inton a
=E2=80=9820th century candidate=E2=80=99=E2=80=9D
*
By Sean Sullivan
July 22, 2014, 9:28 a.m. EDT
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) says former secretary of state Hillary Rodham
Clinton (D) would not offer a platform that addresses the country's future
challenges if she runs for president in 2016.
"I just think she's a 20th century candidate," Rubio told NPR in an
interview published Tuesday. "I think she does not offer an agenda for
moving America forward in the 21st century -- at least not up to now."
Rubio argued that Clinton is "extremely vulnerable in her record" because
of the foreign policy "failures" of the Obama administration.
Rubio, like Clinton, is a possible candidate for president.
It's not the first time Rubio has made the "20th century"" argument. He
said something similar in New Hampshire in May, though he did not mention
Clinton by name. Democrats, Rubio said then, could "nominate someone now
who wants to take us to the past, to an era that is gone and is never
coming back. The 20th century is gone. We live in the 21st century, a time
of extraordinary challenges but also extraordinary opportunities."
Adrienne Elrod, communications director for Correct the Record, a
pro-Clinton super PAC, responded in a statement: "Should she decide to run
for president, Hillary Clinton would present a forward-thinking agenda, one
that presents new, bold ideas to keep our country moving in the right
direction."
*Media Matters for America: =E2=80=9CWhen A GOP Presidential Hopeful Earned=
$11
Million In Speaking Fees And D.C. Press Didn't Care=E2=80=9D
*
By Eric Boehlert
July 22, 2014
[Subtitle:] Different "Wealth" Coverage For Democrats And Republicans
In the thirteen months directly prior to kicking off his Republican
presidential campaign in February 2007, Rudy Giuliani earned more than $11
million dollars giving paid speeches. The former New York City Mayor, who
was thrust into the national and international spotlight after the terror
attacks of September 11, 2001, typically charged between $100,000 and
$300,000 for his speeches and spoke more than 120 times.
According to one speaking contract published at the time, Giuliani required
clients pay for meals and lodging for himself and four travel companions.
Giuliani required a two-bedroom suite (with a king-sized bed) for his
overnight stays; a suite preferably located on an upper floor with a
balcony. Clients also had to pay for four additional rooms to house
Giuliani's entourage.
As for travel, the contract stipulated that clients "should provide Mr.
Giuliani with first class travel expenses for up to 5 people to include a
private plane." What kind of private plane? "Please note that the private
aircraft MUST BE a Gulfstream IV or bigger."
Note that along with the $11 million in speaking fees Giuliani pocketed in
2006, he also earned $8 million on the speech circuit in 2002. If Giuliani
was able to average between $8 and $11 million in speaking fees from 2002
until he announced his candidacy in early 2007, he would have earned more
than $40 million giving speeches in the five years prior to his White House
campaign. (Speaking fees represented only part of his income.)
What's newsworthy about that today? Simply the fact that back in 2007 when
a wealthy Republican became a presidential hopeful the Beltway press didn't
care that he'd earned an eight-figure income giving 45-minute speeches.
(With an additional 15 minutes allotted for Q & A.) Indeed, Giuliani's
financial revelations barely registered with pundits and reporters who gave
the information little time and attention. The Washington Post, for
example, published just three mentions of Giuliani's multi-million dollar
"speaking fees."
The press certainly never elevated the issue to a defining narrative for
the Republican's campaign. Perhaps they realized there was nothing
intrinsically wrong with a speaker being paid what organizations are
willing to offer them.
Compare that collective shoulder shrug with the nearly month-long media
fascination still churning over Hillary Clinton's speaking fees; a
fascination that's part of a larger, misguided media obsession over the
issue of Clinton wealth. ("Speaking fee" articles and columns published by
Post so far this year regarding Clinton? 28.)
Even though the Republican hopeful in thirteen months prior to his
candidacy earned nearly twice as much money in speaking fees as Clinton has
in the sixteen months since stepping down as Secretary of State, the press
has universally agreed that Clinton's fee are not only newsworthy but
deeply disturbing and that her family wealth poses a "a political
liability."
Why a major political hurdle? Clinton's "windfall [is] at odds with her
party's call to shrink the gap between the rich and the poor," Bloomberg
News preposterously proclaimed this week.
Note to media: American history is filled with wealthy Democrats who have
fought for income equality and on behalf of the working class. Based on her
past performance, as a candidate Hillary Clinton would simply extend that
tradition. And last time I checked, the Democratic Party platform doesn't
discourage the accumulation of personal wealth. That's simply a media
stereotype.
The other steadfast media angle in play has been that Clinton's
speech-driven wealth means she's no longer "authentic" and that she's "out
of touch" with everyday voters. But a recent poll thoroughly debunked that
notion, so why does the lazy press keep pushing it?
When you examine the two sets of facts, the press treatment and the gaping
media double standards in play for Giuliani and Clinton could not be more
vivid: The D.C. press holds the Clintons, and Democrats, to a much tougher
standard than they do Republican candidates.
Note that last week, appearing on Morning Joe, while hosts and guests all
agreed that the Clinton speaking fees were a big problem for Hillary, NBC's
Chuck Todd insisted the inflated paychecks looked unseemly [emphasis added]=
:
=E2=80=9CAll of this book tour; all of these decisions to go out and basica=
lly make
your post-presidential money before you run for--before you actually are
president? Which is really what's going [on]. *Ex-presidents make money
like this, not candidates before they run*.=E2=80=9D
But what did Giuliani do in 2006? He went out and made big, "ex-president"
speech money before he ran for president. But most pundits remained quiet.
And how about the Washington Post harping on the fact that Clinton received
big speaking fees from college and universities and that it just looked
bad. (Even though no student fees were used to pay Clinton and she donated
the fees to charity.) Article after article from the Post has obsessed over
that angle.
But guess what Giuliani did? He not only cashed a big university paycheck,
paid for by student fees, but the Republican also demanded the school pay
for his pricey travel.
From the Chicago Tribune, one of the few news organization that took a
close look at Giuliani's speech earnings in 2007:
=E2=80=9CIn one speech last year at Oklahoma State University, Giuliani req=
uested
and received travel *on a private Gulfstream jet that cost the school
$47,000 to operate*. *His visit essentially wiped out the student speakers
annual fund*.=E2=80=9D
By the way, if anyone thinks my description of the Post's Clinton speaking
fees as having been obsessive represents an exaggeration, here's a sampling
from Washingtonpost.com archives of recent, fevered dispatches from the
Clinton speech beat:
University at Buffalo paid $275,000 for Hillary Clinton speech
At time of austerity, 8 universities spent top dollar on Hillary Rodham
Clinton speeches
Hillary Clinton's speaking fees are a drop in the Clinton Foundation's
massive fundraising bucket
Hillary Clinton paid $300,000 and Bill Clinton paid $250,000 for UCLA
speeches
Hillary Clinton says she donated all money from college speeches
Chelsea Clinton speaking fees can reach $75,000
Here's what Hillary Clinton's $225,000 speaking fee could buy on the
campaign trail
Ten questions about those donated speaking fees
What did the Post's coverage of Giuliani's speaking fees look like in 2007?
It looked liked this:
Disclosure Forms Show Wealthy Lot Of Hopefuls
Giuliani to Seek Advice From FEC About Speaking Fees
That, according to a Nexis search, captures most of the Post's coverage and
commentary about Giuliani's $11 million earnings from speaking fees. You'll
note in the first piece the Post didn't even publish a stand-alone article
about the topic. Instead, the paper simply grouped Giuliani's speaking fees
with the other candidates and detailed all their earnings. (The issue
garnered three additional sentences of coverage is this Post article.)
As for the second article -- the only one the paper published devoted
entirely to Giuliani's speeches -- the Post focused exclusively on any
ethical issues raised by Giuliani continuing to give paid speeches after he
had formed a presidential exploratory committee, not on whether he'd earned
too much money, which is what the current Clinton coverage revolves around.
For Giuliani, being a Republican and cashing large checks for speaking fees
was definitely not a political problem according to the Washington Post,
and according to the rest of the Beltway press, which now on a weekly, and
sometimes even daily, basis devotes time and space to harshly examining
Hillary's earnings.
*Washington Post opinion: Catherine Rampell: =E2=80=9CLimousine liberalism=
=E2=80=99s good
works=E2=80=9D
=
*
By Catherine Rampell
July 21, 2014, 7:28 p.m. EDT
Is it hypocritical for a really, really rich person to object to rising
inequality?
I=E2=80=99ve been thinking about this in light of the derision the Clintons=
are
facing for charging six-figure speaking fees while pontificating about
income polarization and the plight of the poor.
Other high-income, high-net-worth figures have been similarly mocked for
expressing concerns about a growing income and wealth imbalance that
benefited them. Among the targeted upper-crusters are Goldman Sachs chief
executive Lloyd Blankfein, who said in a recent interview that =E2=80=9Ctoo=
much of
the [gross domestic product] over the last generation has gone to too few
of the people=E2=80=9D; Warren Buffett, the Oracle of Omaha, who has advoca=
ted
higher tax rates on high-earners such as himself and consistently decried
rising inequality; and Paul Krugman, the Nobel-winning economist and New
York Times columnist who will soon receive $25,000 a month from an
institute that studies income inequality.
These economic elites aren=E2=80=99t alone in balking at rising inequality.=
A rare
survey of 1 percenters found that nearly two-thirds believe =E2=80=9Cdiffer=
ences in
income in America are too large,=E2=80=9D according to research by Benjamin=
I.
Page, Larry M. Bartels and Jason Seawright. That=E2=80=99s almost identical=
to the
share of the general population that espouses this view.
Given the e-mails I received when I wrote last week about Chelsea Clinton=
=E2=80=99s
lucrative speaking gigs, lots of people see this sort of =E2=80=9Climousine
liberalism=E2=80=9D as, if not outright hypocrisy, at least a sign of cogni=
tive
dissonance. The implication is that to credibly care about =E2=80=94 and ad=
vocate
on behalf of =E2=80=94 poor people, you need to take a vow of poverty yours=
elf.
I find this view highly problematic.
First of all, when low-income people do jump on the soapbox about raising
taxes on the rich or expanding the social safety net, they=E2=80=99re usual=
ly
accused of class warfare. But more important, the poor, unlike
billionaires, don=E2=80=99t get a lot of airtime.
Pretty much every time a rich person sneezes, a banner headline sprouts.
Some of this outsize influence over the public discourse comes from the
fact that very rich people tend to be more politically active than the
typical American. Billionaires have the resources to spritz their agendas
throughout the airwaves, and when they ask the White House for a meeting,
they can be pretty sure they will be accommodated . But some of their
influence reflects the fact that regular Americans, for whatever reason,
put a lot of stock in what rich people think, no matter how inane such
commentary might be. We listen when Kim Kardashian prattles on about
=E2=80=9Chaving it all=E2=80=9D and when Tom Perkins mouths off about appor=
tioning votes
according to taxes paid. Why? Because, as Tevye the Milkman wisely
surmised, =E2=80=9CWhen you=E2=80=99re rich, they think you really know.=E2=
=80=9D
Given this state of affairs, I would much rather the megarich wield their
wealth and influence to try to improve conditions for the working class,
rather than to further pad their pocketbooks.
Of course, when it comes to inequality, these two goals are not necessarily
mutually exclusive. Blankfein=E2=80=99s objections to rising inequality, fo=
r
example, could be said to represent a sort of enlightened self-interest, as
he emphasized that he thinks the yawning income gap is politically
=E2=80=9Cdestabilizing=E2=80=9D and could lead to legislative gridlock and =
slower economic
growth =E2=80=94 all of which potentially affect his own well-being.
But for some rags-to-riches moguls =E2=80=94 including Blankfein and Bill C=
linton,
both of whom grew up poor =E2=80=94 objections to economic inequity may als=
o
reflect a fear that the system is now stacked against the kinds of people
they once were. As social structures ossify and the income ladder becomes
more rickety, the son of a postal clerk, growing up in a Brooklyn housing
project, might never again be able to rise to become the chief executive of
one of the United States=E2=80=99 biggest financial institutions.
Amassing a great fortune can lead to a very different outlook on life. For
some, success begets contempt for those not similarly situated, those lazy
schmoes who didn=E2=80=99t manage to lift themselves up by their own bootst=
raps.
(One recent study of lottery winners, for example, found that a financial
windfall typically leads people to become less egalitarian-minded and more
approving of the existing distribution of wealth.) But for others,
proximity to poor and working-class Americans can be a constant reminder
that there but for the grace of God go they. The term I=E2=80=99d use for a=
1
percenter who expresses concern about the wages, economic opportunities and
safety nets available to the 99 percent is not hypocrisy; it=E2=80=99s empa=
thy.
*The Hill blog: Ballot Box: =E2=80=9CRubio: Clinton is =E2=80=9820th centur=
y candidate=E2=80=99=E2=80=9D
*
By Jesse Byrnes
July 22, 2014, 9:13 a.m. EDT
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) on Tuesday said Hillary Clinton is a =E2=80=9C20t=
h
century candidate=E2=80=9D ill-suited to leading the nation going forward.
=E2=80=9CI just think she=E2=80=99s a 20th century candidate,=E2=80=9D Rubi=
o told NPR. =E2=80=9CI think she
does not offer an agenda for moving America forward in the 21st century, at
least not up till now.=E2=80=9D
Rubio, who=E2=80=99s weighing a White House bid or reelection in Florida, s=
aid he
would make his decision about a presidential run by early 2015.
=E2=80=9CThere's a lot of work to be done if you're going to run for presid=
ent, or
if you're going to run for reelection in a state as big as Florida,=E2=80=
=9D Rubio
said.
Earlier this month the freshman senator said he believed he could beat
Clinton in a race for the White House.
=E2=80=9CMultiple people can beat her. Hillary Clinton is not unbeatable,=
=E2=80=9D he said
in an interview with radio host Hugh Hewitt.
On Tuesday, Rubio reiterated his attack on the former secretary of State's
record, saying she worked in =E2=80=9Can administration that has had virtua=
lly no
successes on foreign policy.=E2=80=9D
The Cuban-American senator, who last year co-sponsored an immigration
overhaul that passed the Senate but failed in the House, also called for
immigration reform amid the recent border crisis. But he said there first
must be better border security and a modernization of the immigration
system.
Democrats fired back, arguing Rubio's policies would take the coutnry back
even further.
The criticism of Clinton is "rich coming from a Senator who wants the
minimum wage to have less purchasing power than it did in the 1960=E2=80=99=
s, take
women=E2=80=99s health care back to the 1950=E2=80=99s, shut down the gover=
nment like
Republicans did in the 1990=E2=80=99s and has voted time and again to end M=
edicare
as we know it," Democratic National Committee nation press secretary
Michael Czin said in an e-mail.
*Des Moines Register: =E2=80=9CPossible presidential rival to Hillary Clint=
on
coming to Iowa again=E2=80=9D
*
By Jennifer Jacobs
July 22, 2014, 10:15 a.m. EDT
Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley seems willing to fill the void in Iowa from
the relative lack of Democratic White House hopefuls touching base here.
It has been 2,392 days since Hillary Clinton, the Democrats' most popular
choice for a 2016 presidential run, stepped foot in Iowa in 2008.
But O'Malley, who was just here a month ago for his introductory visit of
the 2016 cycle will return this weekend to gain more exposure - and to
campaign for Iowa candidates running for office this fall.
O'Malley will help raise money for Iowa Democrat Jack Hatch, who is
challenging Republican Terry Branstad for the governor's office, as well as
for state Sen. Rita Hart of Wheatland and for Kevin Kinney, a sheriff's
deputy from Johnson County who's running for the Iowa Senate this fall. His
pending trip was first reported by Politico.
In comparison to the traffic from the GOP presidential aspirants, Iowa
hasn't gotten much attention from Democrats who are on the buzz list for
2016. Liberal blogger John Deeth keeps a running tally on his website on
Clinton's absence; she has said she is still trying to decide whether to
run for president a second time.
U.S. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota will be back in Iowa on Aug. 23 to campaign
for U.S. Senate hopeful Bruce Braley; she was last here in August 2013.
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent will make his second
Iowa visit this year when he holds events in Dubuque on Sept. 13 and in
Waterloo and Des Moines on Sept. 14 =E2=80=93 the likely weekend of the Har=
kin
Steak Fry. Vice President Joe Biden dropped in on a couple hundred Iowans
who were in D.C. for an annual lobbying trip in May, and was last in Iowa
for the steak fry in September 2013. Former Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer
was here in December. And a group of people who claim to be from Iowa are
trying to recruit U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia to run for
president.
O'Malley who received a warm welcome from Iowa Democratic activists during
a two-day visit a month ago. He praised retired U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin at a
dinner on June 20, then gave the keynote speech at the Democrats' state
convention on June 21. In his speech, orated with the aid of teleprompters,
O'Malley offered up commentary on his achievements and his belief in the
future.
Linda Langston, who is one of Iowa's representatives to the Democratic
National Committee, in an interview with the Register last month predicted
that Iowans will be intrigued by O'Malley. "He's well positioned to run
should (Clinton) decide not to run," she said. "And obviously if she does
run, she's got to figure out who she's going to put her on the ticket with
her."
In summer 2012, O'Malley courted Iowa activists at the Democratic National
Convention in North Carolina, and he was the keynote speaker at U.S. Sen.
Tom Harkin's 35th annualsteak fry fundraiser in fall 2012.
*Slate: =E2=80=9CAdventures in Warrenland=E2=80=9D
*
By David Weigel
July 21, 2014, 5:51 p.m. EDT
[Subtitle:] The movement to elect Elizabeth Warren president is make
believe.
DETROIT=E2=80=94Every time she=E2=80=99s asked, Sen. Elizabeth Warren gives=
the same
frustrated answer. No. Nope. She is not running for president. She has
literally rolled her eyes at the question. She=E2=80=99s offered to =E2=80=
=9Cadd an
exclamation point.=E2=80=9D She=E2=80=99s even signed a letter calling on H=
illary Clinton,
who leads polls of Democrats by up to 50 points, to run for president.
And yet there they were on Friday morning, the people who wanted Warren to
reconsider. Days before this year=E2=80=99s Netroots Nation conference, the=
annual
gathering of the online left, an Obama campaign veteran launched a draft
campaign called Ready for Warren. (The name is a wink at the pro-Clinton
PAC Ready for Hillary, which claims to have 2.5 million supporters in its
database.) The new group printed =E2=80=9CWarren for President=E2=80=9D sig=
ns and plastered
=E2=80=9CWarren for President=E2=80=9D stickers on free skimmer hats. As ac=
tivists entered
the Cobo Center, which resembles a pile of faded Rubik=E2=80=99s Cubes that=
have
tumbled from a closet, volunteers handed out the goods. There was even a
folk song soundtrack, by Jessie Murphy:
Americans want our next president to be a woman
Hey babe, here=E2=80=99s lookin=E2=80=99 at you, Senator Elizabeth Warren
The planet is warming and the power is shifting
We will need a leader who won=E2=80=99t stand for all the Wall Street bulls=
hit, the
lobbyist grifting
The reluctant hero never stood a chance. When her applause lines hit, up
went the signs.
=E2=80=9CThe game is rigged,=E2=80=9D said Warren toward the end of her rem=
arks. =E2=80=9CWe can
whine about it, we can whimper about it, or we can fight back. I=E2=80=99m =
ready to
fight back. Are you ready to fight back on this?=E2=80=9D
Up went the signs, up went the chant: =E2=80=9CRun, Liz, Run.=E2=80=9D
=E2=80=9CSi=E2=80=99down,=E2=80=9D Warren chuckled. =E2=80=9CSi=E2=80=99dow=
n.=E2=80=9D
But the story was already being told. The signs made it into write-ups by
Politico, Huffington Post, McClatchy, and a Washington Post story about how
=E2=80=9Ccracks are beginning to emerge=E2=80=9D in the Clinton restoration=
=E2=80=99s coalition.
The evidence for a left-wing challenge to Clinton that could defeat her is
thin to nonexistent. Defeating Clinton wasn=E2=80=99t even a theme at Netro=
ots
Nation, where in 2007 both Sens. Barack Obama and John Edwards clearly
outpaced her in support. Anyone who could force Clinton to the left=E2=80=
=94on Wall
Street, on bank reform, on student loans, on inequality=E2=80=94was worth t=
alking
about. Not far from where Warren was speaking, a D.C. activist named Edrie
Irvine was sporting a Bernie Sanders for President 2016 shirt, and getting
into conversations that assumed the Vermont senator could never win.
=E2=80=9CI love my Bernie,=E2=80=9D said Irvine. =E2=80=9CI want him to run=
not because I expect
that he would ever win, but because he would force the conversation in a
direction it might not otherwise go.=E2=80=9D
That=E2=80=99s just it. Progressives want to change the party, which means =
more
than choosing a president. (Several Netroots panels featured activists who
had moved the Obama administration when it was acting too slowly on issues
like immigration.) The institutions that created the online left were
birthed by no-chance campaigns. MoveOn was founded in 1998 by Silicon
Valley liberals who wanted Congress to stop short of impeaching Bill
Clinton. =E2=80=9CCensure,=E2=80=9D it said, =E2=80=9Cand move on.=E2=80=9D=
Howard Dean=E2=80=99s 2004 campaign
brought in a young generation of activists and techies, spawning some of
the data and campaign companies that would elect Barack Obama.
Yet MoveOn lost its first fight. The Dean campaign lost every major
primary. The lesson activists took away: Try something. The media, at
least, is going to cover a primary threat more than it covers a sui generis
student loan bill.
Thus the Warren =E2=80=9Cpresidential campaign,=E2=80=9D a masterful brandi=
ng and messaging
exercise. In September 2013, the New York Times wrote an attention-getting
profile of Warren=E2=80=99s appeal to progressives, proven by the growing c=
rowds
for organizers wise enough to book her. =E2=80=9CBumper stickers and T-shir=
ts
surfacing in liberal enclaves proclaim, =E2=80=98I=E2=80=99m from the Eliza=
beth Warren Wing
of the Democratic Party.=E2=80=99 =E2=80=9D Jonathan Martin reported that t=
hose stickers
were mass-produced by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which was
founded in 2009 by Adam Green (a veteran of MoveOn and Democratic
campaigns) and Stephanie Taylor (a veteran of the SEIU, AFL-CIO, and yes,
MoveOn).
In its early years, the PCCC confounded Democrats, losing a run of
primaries and buying ads to pressure red state Senate Democrats who were
slow-walking the Affordable Care Act. The Warren brand=E2=80=94earned after=
the
group signed up activists and donors for her nascent Senate bid=E2=80=94is
self-evidently a way to move the conversation, whether or not anyone
challenges Clinton. =E2=80=9CWe=E2=80=99re going to make sure that every De=
mocrat who runs
for president is forced to say whether they agree with Elizabeth Warren on
key issues,=E2=80=9D Green told the Boston Globe last year, =E2=80=9Clike e=
xpanding Social
Security benefits and more Wall Street reform.=E2=80=9D
Green repeated that point at the Netroots conference, though he hardly
needed to. Rep. Dan Kildee, a freshman Democrat from one of the new safe
Michigan districts, said it was =E2=80=9Cclear=E2=80=9D that any 2016 candi=
date had to cop
from Warren.
=E2=80=9CThe basic premise, that we need to restore some balance in the equ=
ation
between corporate interests and consumers=E2=80=94that=E2=80=99s what she=
=E2=80=99s done for a long
time,=E2=80=9D he said, recalling how he=E2=80=99d cited her when he worked=
at a think
tank. =E2=80=9CMore people should embrace it. It cuts across partisan lines=
. =E2=80=9C
But he wasn=E2=80=99t calling for a primary. The point was getting the next
candidate to move where the Netroots crowd wanted her to move.
=E2=80=9CHillary Clinton is going to say these things,=E2=80=9D said former=
Rep. Brad
Miller, a North Carolina Democrat who left his seat after a 2011
gerrymander. =E2=80=9CWhoever our Democratic nominee is will run as an econ=
omic
populist. When the pollsters and consultants come back with the numbers,
they=E2=80=99ll tell her: Holy crap, you may not have been a populist befor=
e, but
you are one now! The problem will be credibility, and whether it=E2=80=99s
believable coming from someone who has close ties to the financial sector.=
=E2=80=9D
At the conference, for most attendees, Clinton was credible enough. A Ready
for Hillary organizer pointed out that some of the people who applauded
when they saw Warren at a nearby hotel were sporting Hillary gear. There
was no mass boycott of the main Friday night party, sponsored by Ready for
Hillary, held at a downtown music venue called St. Andrews, with the PAC=E2=
=80=99s
bus parked right outside. As guests arrived, they ran into a table loaded
with PAC stickers (=E2=80=9CI=E2=80=99m ready for Hillary=E2=80=9D) and the=
room-filling pop of
KGB, a Motown cover band.
Activists born in the 1980s; music from the 1960s. Not the ideal metaphor
for a Clinton campaign, but it got a PCCC leader tweeting that after =E2=80=
=9Cone
more margarita=E2=80=9D even he, too, would be ready for the Clintons.
I didn=E2=80=99t find a true Clinton critic, actually, until the next night=
=E2=80=99s
after-party. It was hosted by the Alliance for American Manufacturing. (In
a Saturday speech, the labor group=E2=80=99s president, Scott Paul, had tol=
d
activists to nominate =E2=80=9Ca woman who not only says the right thing bu=
t does
the right thing.=E2=80=9D) At the party, I ran into the last guy who challe=
nged
Clinton from the left and lost. Jonathan Tasini, a writer and activist who
ran against Clinton in the 2006 New York U.S. Senate race, was at least
willing to muse about one of the progressive branding campaigns turning
into an actual primary.
=E2=80=9CWarren would have the best chance,=E2=80=9D he said. =E2=80=9CWhen=
ever [Hillary] opens her
mouth, there=E2=80=99s enough people who say: =E2=80=98I just don=E2=80=99t=
believe her.=E2=80=99 =E2=80=9D
But how many Democrats? In 2006, Tasini asked progressives to hold Clinton
accountable for backing the Iraq War. She won the primary with 83 percent
of the vote. And on this particular Saturday night, the Clinton agita was
not too serious. On the way out of the party, Scott Paul spotted me and
corrected the record on his quote=E2=80=94the one absolutely everyone inter=
preted
as a call for Warren to run.
=E2=80=9CI saw the tweet about that,=E2=80=9D he said. =E2=80=9CI wasn=E2=
=80=99t talking about Warren!=E2=80=9D
*Washington Examiner: =E2=80=9C'Lost control': MSNBC hits Hillary Clinton f=
or
wrecking her personal Image=E2=80=9D
*
By T. Becket Adams
July 22, 2014, 8:57 a.m. EDT
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has =E2=80=9Clost control=E2=80=
=9D of her public
Image, a sorry place to be for someone who's reportedly considering a 2016
presidential bid, and she has no one to blame but herself, an MSNBC panel
suggested Tuesday morning.
Questions about whether Clinton has done irreparable harm to her Image
began with "Morning Joe" co-host Mika Brzezinski citing a recent Politico
survey that shows a majority of voters disapprove of how the former first
lady performed as secretary of state.
The poll found that only 14 percent of voters rate Clinton's performance at
state as =E2=80=9Cexcellent,=E2=80=9D while 28 percent rate her performance=
as =E2=80=9Cgood,=E2=80=9D 21
percent rate it as =E2=80=9Cfair=E2=80=9D and 32 percent rate it as =E2=80=
=9Cpoor.=E2=80=9D
=E2=80=9C[I]t's a major change from a year-and-a-half ago when the then-sec=
retary
of state had a 70 percent approval rating,=E2=80=9D Brzezinski said, noting=
a
separate Bloomberg article that reported Clinton has made roughly $12
million since stepping down from state in February 2013.
Co-panelist and political analyst Mark Halperin weighed in on the issue:
=E2=80=9CShe has lost control of her public Image. It's the worst thing tha=
t can
happen to somebody thinking of running for president, and it's at a time
when she should be in command. You know, she had a book tour, she can
control the message,=E2=80=9D he said.
=E2=80=9CHer operation is playing defense on a lot of stories and, again, i=
t's
fine. She can recover from it. But right now, she has lost control of how
people are thinking about her, how the media is covering her."
The Clinton machine, for its part, claims that much of the negative press
surrounding the former secretary of state is either uninteresting or simply
untrue. Meanwhile, Clinton's tour promoting her new book, Hard Choices,
continues apace, providing the media with one wealth-related gaffe after
another.
=E2=80=9CWould it have been better -- in hindsight -- if Hillary Clinton ha=
d not
written this book and gone on a book tour?=E2=80=9D co-panelist Willie Geis=
t asked.
=E2=80=9CBecause look where she was when she was out of the fray: No one wa=
s
talking about her in terms of politics, just in terms of how she had done
as secretary of state.=E2=80=9D
=E2=80=9CShe=E2=80=99d have less money,=E2=80=9D Halperin responded, grinni=
ng like a Cheshire cat.
--001a11c305806280c604fecc162d
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=E2=80=9C=E2=80=98Should she =
decide to run for president, Hillary Clinton would present a forward-thinki=
ng agenda, one that presents new, bold ideas to keep our country moving in =
the right direction. With his history supporting the Tea Party=E2=80=99s ou=
tdated, regressive policies, Senator Rubio is the one stuck in the stone ag=
es. This is nothing but a desperate attempt by him to divert from his faile=
d legislative record,=E2=80=99 Adrienne Elrod, communications director at t=
he pro-Clinton rapid response shop Correct The Record, told CNN.=E2=80=9D=
p>

=E2=80=9CAdrienne Elrod, comm=
unications director for Correct the Record, a pro-Clinton super PAC, respon=
ded in a statement: =E2=80=98Should she decide to run for president, Hillar=
y Clinton would present a forward-thinking agenda, one that presents new, b=
old ideas to keep our country moving in the right direction.=E2=80=99=E2=80=
=9D

=E2=80=9CEven though the Repu=
blican hopeful in thirteen months prior to his candidacy earned nearly twic=
e as much money in speaking fees as Clinton has in the sixteen months since=
stepping down as Secretary of State, the press has universally agreed that=
Clinton's fee are not only newsworthy but deeply disturbing and that h=
er family wealth poses a =E2=80=98a political liability.=E2=80=99=E2=80=9D<=
/p>

=E2=80=9CThe term I=E2=80=99d=
use for a 1 percenter who expresses concern about the wages, economic oppo=
rtunities and safety nets available to the 99=E2=80=89percent is not hypocrisy; it=
=E2=80=99s empathy.=E2=80=9D

=E2=80=9CThe criticism of Clinton is =E2=80=98r=
ich coming from a Senator who wants the minimum wage to have less purchasin=
g power than it did in the 1960=E2=80=99s, take women=E2=80=99s health care=
back to the 1950=E2=80=99s, shut down the government like Republicans did =
in the 1990=E2=80=99s and has voted time and again to end Medicare as we kn=
ow it,=E2=80=99 Democratic National Committee nation press secretary Michae=
l Czin said in an e-mail.=E2=80=9D

=E2=80=
=9CFormer Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has =E2=80=98lost control=E2=
=80=99 of her public Image, a sorry place to be for someone who's repor=
tedly considering a 2016 presidential bid, and she has no one to blame but =
herself, an MSNBC panel suggested Tuesday morning.=E2=80=9D

"I think she does not of=
fer an agenda for moving America forward in the 21st century, at least not =
up till now," Rubio said, in an interview with "Morning Edition&q=
uot; that posted early Tuesday.

=C2=A0

"The truth of the matter=
is she was the secretary of state during an administration that has had vi=
rtually no successes on foreign policy," Rubio added.

=C2=A0

This is far from the first ti=
me Rubio's been critical of Clinton's tenure as America's top d=
iplomat.

=C2=A0

"First, I think she'=
s going to be asked to account for her time as secretary of state and I don=
't think it's the sterling success people think it is. Quite frankl=
y, much of the foreign policy failures we see in place today began when she=
ran the Department of State," Rubio told CNN's Wolf Blitzer in an=
interview in February on "The Situation Room."

=C2=A0

"Should she decide to ru=
n for president, Hillary Clinton would present a forward-thinking agenda, o=
ne that presents new, bold ideas to keep our country moving in the right di=
rection. With his history supporting the Tea Party=E2=80=99s outdated, regr=
essive policies, Senator Rubio is the one stuck in the stone ages. This is =
nothing but a desperate attempt by him to divert from his failed legislativ=
e record," Adrienne Elrod, communications director at the pro-Clinton =
rapid response shop Correct The Record, told CNN.

=C2=A0

Clinton has said she'll d=
ecide on running for the White House by the end of this year or early next =
year. Rubio, who's also up for re-election to the Senate in 2016, said =
in the NPR interview that he'd make up his mind by early 2015.

=C2=A0

"There's a lot of wo=
rk to be done if you're going to run for president, or if you're go=
ing to run for re-election in a state as big as Florida," Rubio added.=

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) says former secretary of state Hillary Rodham =
Clinton (D) would not offer a platform that addresses the country's fut=
ure challenges if she runs for president in 2016.

=C2=A0

"I just think she's =
a 20th century candidate," Rubio told NPR in an interview published Tu=
esday. "I think she does not offer an agenda for moving America forwar=
d in the 21st century -- at least not up to now."

=C2=A0

Rubio argued that Clinton is =
"extremely vulnerable in her record" because of the foreign polic=
y "failures" of the Obama administration.

=C2=A0

Rubio, like Clinton, is a pos=
sible candidate for president.

=C2=A0

It's not the first time R=
ubio has made the "20th century"" argument. He said somethin=
g similar in New Hampshire in May, though he did not mention Clinton by nam=
e. Democrats, Rubio said then, could "nominate someone now who wants t=
o take us to the past, to an era that is gone and is never coming back. The=
20th century is gone. We live in the 21st century, a time of extraordinary=
challenges but also extraordinary opportunities."

=C2=A0

Adrienne Elrod, communication=
s director for Correct the Record, a pro-Clinton super PAC, responded in a =
statement: "Should she decide to run for president, Hillary Clinton wo=
uld present a forward-thinking agenda, one that presents new, bold ideas to=
keep our country moving in the right direction."

[Subtitle:=
] Different "Wealth" Coverage For Democrats And Republicans

=C2=A0

In the thirteen months direct=
ly prior to kicking off his Republican presidential campaign in February 20=
07, Rudy Giuliani earned more than $11 million dollars giving paid speeches=
. The former New York City Mayor, who was thrust into the national and inte=
rnational spotlight after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, typical=
ly charged between $100,000 and $300,000 for his speeches and spoke more th=
an 120 times.=C2=A0

=C2=A0

According to one speaking con=
tract published at the time, Giuliani required clients pay for meals and lo=
dging for himself and four travel companions. Giuliani required a two-bedro=
om suite (with a king-sized bed) for his overnight stays; a suite preferabl=
y located on an upper floor with a balcony. Clients also had to pay for fou=
r additional rooms to house Giuliani's entourage.

=C2=A0

As for travel, the contract s=
tipulated that clients "should provide Mr. Giuliani with first class t=
ravel expenses for up to 5 people to include a private plane." What ki=
nd of private plane? "Please note that the private aircraft MUST BE a =
Gulfstream IV or bigger."

=C2=A0

Note that along with the $11 =
million in speaking fees Giuliani pocketed in 2006, he also earned $8 milli=
on on the speech circuit in 2002. If Giuliani was able to average between $=
8 and $11 million in speaking fees from 2002 until he announced his candida=
cy in early 2007, he would have earned more than $40 million giving speeche=
s in the five years prior to his White House campaign. (Speaking fees repre=
sented only part of his income.)

The press certainly never ele=
vated the issue to a defining narrative for the Republican's campaign. =
Perhaps they realized there was nothing intrinsically wrong with a speaker =
being paid what organizations are willing to offer them.

=C2=A0

Compare that collective shoul=
der shrug with the nearly month-long media fascination still churning over =
Hillary Clinton's speaking fees; a fascination that's part of a lar=
ger, misguided media obsession over the issue of Clinton wealth. ("Spe=
aking fee" articles=C2=A0 and columns published by Post so far this ye=
ar regarding Clinton? 28.)

=C2=A0

Even though the Republican ho=
peful in thirteen months prior to his candidacy earned nearly twice as much=
money in speaking fees as Clinton has in the sixteen months since stepping=
down as Secretary of State, the press has universally agreed that Clinton&=
#39;s fee are not only newsworthy but deeply disturbing and that her family=
wealth poses a "a political liability."

=C2=A0

Why a major political hurdle?=
Clinton's "windfall [is] at odds with her party's call to shr=
ink the gap between the rich and the poor," Bloomberg News preposterou=
sly proclaimed this week.

=C2=A0

Note to media: American histo=
ry is filled with wealthy Democrats who have fought for income equality and=
on behalf of the working class. Based on her past performance, as a candid=
ate Hillary Clinton would simply extend that tradition. And last time I che=
cked, the Democratic Party platform doesn't discourage the accumulation=
of personal wealth. That's simply a media stereotype.

=C2=A0

The other steadfast media ang=
le in play has been that Clinton's speech-driven wealth means she's=
no longer "authentic" and that she's "out of touch&quot=
; with everyday voters. But a recent poll thoroughly debunked that notion, =
so why does the lazy press keep pushing it?

=C2=A0

When you examine the two sets=
of facts, the press treatment and the gaping media double standards in pla=
y for Giuliani and Clinton could not be more vivid: The D.C. press holds th=
e Clintons, and Democrats, to a much tougher standard than they do Republic=
an candidates.

=C2=A0

Note that last week, appearin=
g on Morning Joe, while hosts and guests all agreed that the Clinton speaki=
ng fees were a big problem for Hillary, NBC's Chuck Todd insisted the i=
nflated paychecks looked unseemly [emphasis added]:

=C2=A0

=E2=80=9CAll of this book tou=
r; all of these decisions to go out and basically make your post-presidenti=
al money before you run for--before you actually are president? Which is re=
ally what's going [on].=C2=A0Ex-presidents make money like this, not=
candidates before they run.=E2=80=9D

=C2=A0

But what did Giuliani do in 2=
006? He went out and made big, "ex-president" speech money before=
he ran for president. But most pundits remained quiet.

=C2=A0

And how about the Washington =
Post harping on the fact that Clinton received big speaking fees from colle=
ge and universities and that it just looked bad. (Even though no student fe=
es were used to pay Clinton and she donated the fees to charity.) Article a=
fter article from the Post has obsessed over that angle.

=C2=A0

But guess what Giuliani did? =
He not only cashed a big university paycheck, paid for by student fees, but=
the Republican also demanded the school pay for his pricey travel.

=C2=A0

From the Chicago Tribune, one=
of the few news organization that took a close look at Giuliani's spee=
ch earnings in 2007:

=C2=A0

=E2=80=9CIn one speech last y=
ear at Oklahoma State University, Giuliani requested and received travel=C2=
=A0on a private Gulfstream jet that cost the school $47,000 to operate=
b>.=C2=A0His visit essentially wiped out the student speakers annual fun=
d.=E2=80=9D

=C2=A0

By the way, if anyone thinks =
my description of the Post's Clinton speaking fees as having been obses=
sive represents an exaggeration, here's a sampling from Washingtonpost.=
com archives of recent, fevered dispatches from the Clinton speech beat:

=C2=A0

University at Buffalo paid $2=
75,000 for Hillary Clinton speech

=C2=A0

At time of austerity, 8 unive=
rsities spent top dollar on Hillary Rodham Clinton speeches

What did the Post's cover=
age of Giuliani's speaking fees look like in 2007? It looked liked this=
:

=C2=A0

Disclosure Forms Show Wealthy=
Lot Of Hopefuls

=C2=A0

Giuliani to Seek Advice From =
FEC About Speaking Fees

=C2=A0

That, according to a Nexis se=
arch, captures most of the Post's coverage and commentary about Giulian=
i's $11 million earnings from speaking fees. You'll note in the fir=
st piece the Post didn't even publish a stand-alone article about the t=
opic. Instead, the paper simply grouped Giuliani's speaking fees with t=
he other candidates and detailed all their earnings. (The issue garnered th=
ree additional sentences of coverage is this Post article.)

=C2=A0

As for the second article -- =
the only one the paper published devoted entirely to Giuliani's speeche=
s -- the Post focused exclusively on any ethical issues raised by Giuliani =
continuing to give paid speeches after he had formed a presidential explora=
tory committee, not on whether he'd earned too much money, which is wha=
t the current Clinton coverage revolves around.

=C2=A0

For Giuliani, being a Republi=
can and cashing large checks for speaking fees was definitely not a politic=
al problem according to the Washington Post, and according to the rest of t=
he Beltway press, which now on a weekly, and sometimes even daily, basis de=
votes time and space to harshly examining Hillary's earnings.

Is it hypocritical for a really, really rich person to object to rising =
inequality?

=C2=A0

I=E2=80=99ve been thinking ab=
out this in light of the derision the Clintons are facing for charging six-=
figure speaking fees while pontificating about income polarization and the =
plight of the poor.

=C2=A0

Other high-income, high-net-w=
orth figures have been similarly mocked for expressing concerns about a gro=
wing income and wealth imbalance that benefited them. Among the targeted up=
per-crusters are Goldman Sachs chief executive Lloyd Blankfein, who said in=
a recent interview that =E2=80=9Ctoo much of the [gross domestic product] =
over the last generation has gone to too few of the people=E2=80=9D; Warren=
Buffett, the Oracle of Omaha, who has advocated higher tax rates on high-e=
arners such as himself and consistently decried rising inequality; and Paul=
Krugman, the Nobel-winning economist and New York Times columnist who will=
soon receive $25,000 a month from an institute that studies income inequal=
ity.

=C2=A0

These economic elites aren=E2=
=80=99t alone in balking at rising inequality. A rare survey of 1 percenter=
s found that nearly two-thirds believe =E2=80=9Cdifferences in income in Am=
erica are too large,=E2=80=9D according to research by Benjamin I. Page, La=
rry M. Bartels and Jason Seawright. That=E2=80=99s almost identical to the =
share of the general population that espouses this view.

=C2=A0

Given the e-mails I received =
when I wrote last week about Chelsea Clinton=E2=80=99s lucrative speaking g=
igs, lots of people see this sort of =E2=80=9Climousine liberalism=E2=80=9D=
as, if not outright hypocrisy, at least a sign of cognitive dissonance. Th=
e implication is that to credibly care about =E2=80=94 and advocate on beha=
lf of =E2=80=94 poor people, you need to take a vow of poverty yourself.

=C2=A0

I find this view highly probl=
ematic.

=C2=A0

First of all, when low-income=
people do jump on the soapbox about raising taxes on the rich or expanding=
the social safety net, they=E2=80=99re usually accused of class warfare. B=
ut more important, the poor, unlike billionaires, don=E2=80=99t get a lot o=
f airtime.

=C2=A0

Pretty much every time a rich=
person sneezes, a banner headline sprouts. Some of this outsize influence =
over the public discourse comes from the fact that very rich people tend to=
be more politically active than the typical American. Billionaires have th=
e resources to spritz their agendas throughout the airwaves, and when they =
ask the White House for a meeting, they can be pretty sure they will be acc=
ommodated . But some of their influence reflects the fact that regular Amer=
icans, for whatever reason, put a lot of stock in what rich people think, n=
o matter how inane such commentary might be. We listen when Kim Kardashian =
prattles on about =E2=80=9Chaving it all=E2=80=9D and when Tom Perkins mout=
hs off about apportioning votes according to taxes paid. Why? Because, as T=
evye the Milkman wisely surmised, =E2=80=9CWhen you=E2=80=99re rich, they t=
hink you really know.=E2=80=9D

=C2=A0

Given this state of affairs, =
I would much rather the megarich wield their wealth and influence to try to=
improve conditions for the working class, rather than to further pad their=
pocketbooks.

=C2=A0

Of course, when it comes to i=
nequality, these two goals are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Blankfei=
n=E2=80=99s objections to rising inequality, for example, could be said to =
represent a sort of enlightened self-interest, as he emphasized that he thi=
nks the yawning income gap is politically =E2=80=9Cdestabilizing=E2=80=9D a=
nd could lead to legislative gridlock and slower economic growth =E2=80=94 =
all of which potentially affect his own well-being.

=C2=A0

But for some rags-to-riches m=
oguls =E2=80=94 including Blankfein and Bill Clinton, both of whom grew up =
poor =E2=80=94 objections to economic inequity may also reflect a fear that=
the system is now stacked against the kinds of people they once were. As s=
ocial structures ossify and the income ladder becomes more rickety, the son=
of a postal clerk, growing up in a Brooklyn housing project, might never a=
gain be able to rise to become the chief executive of one of the United Sta=
tes=E2=80=99 biggest financial institutions.

=C2=A0

Amassing a great fortune can =
lead to a very different outlook on life. For some, success begets contempt=
for those not similarly situated, those lazy schmoes who didn=E2=80=99t ma=
nage to lift themselves up by their own bootstraps. (One recent study of lo=
ttery winners, for example, found that a financial windfall typically leads=
people to become less egalitarian-minded and more approving of the existin=
g distribution of wealth.) But for others, proximity to poor and working-cl=
ass Americans can be a constant reminder that there but for the grace of Go=
d go they. The term I=E2=80=99d use for a 1 percenter who expresses concern=
about the wages, economic opportunities and safety nets available to the 9=
9=E2=80=89percent is not hypocrisy; it=E2=80=99s empathy.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) on Tuesday said Hillary Clinton is a =E2=80=9C=
20th century candidate=E2=80=9D ill-suited to leading the nation going forw=
ard.

=C2=A0

=E2=80=9CI just think she=E2=
=80=99s a 20th century candidate,=E2=80=9D Rubio told NPR. =E2=80=9CI think=
she does not offer an agenda for moving America forward in the 21st centur=
y, at least not up till now.=E2=80=9D

=C2=A0

Rubio, who=E2=80=99s weighing=
a White House bid or reelection in Florida, said he would make his decisio=
n about a presidential run by early 2015.

=E2=80=9CThere's a lot of work to be done if you'=
re going to run for president, or if you're going to run for reelection=
in a state as big as Florida,=E2=80=9D Rubio said.

=C2=A0

Earlier this month the freshm=
an senator said he believed he could beat Clinton in a race for the White H=
ouse.

=C2=A0

=E2=80=9CMultiple people can =
beat her. Hillary Clinton is not unbeatable,=E2=80=9D he said in an intervi=
ew with radio host Hugh Hewitt.

=C2=A0

On Tuesday, Rubio reiterated =
his attack on the former secretary of State's record, saying she worked=
in =E2=80=9Can administration that has had virtually no successes on forei=
gn policy.=E2=80=9D

=C2=A0

The Cuban-American senator, w=
ho last year co-sponsored an immigration overhaul that passed the Senate bu=
t failed in the House, also called for immigration reform amid the recent b=
order crisis. But he said there first must be better border security and a =
modernization of the immigration system.

=C2=A0

Democrats fired back, arguing=
Rubio's policies would take the coutnry back even further.

=C2=A0

The criticism of Clinton is &=
quot;rich coming from a Senator who wants the minimum wage to have less pur=
chasing power than it did in the 1960=E2=80=99s, take women=E2=80=99s healt=
h care back to the 1950=E2=80=99s, shut down the government like Republican=
s did in the 1990=E2=80=99s and has voted time and again to end Medicare as=
we know it," Democratic National Committee nation press secretary Mic=
hael Czin said in an e-mail.

Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley seems willing to fill the void in Iow=
a from the relative lack of Democratic White House hopefuls touching base h=
ere.

=C2=A0

It has been 2,392 days since =
Hillary Clinton, the Democrats' most popular choice for a 2016 presiden=
tial run, stepped foot in Iowa in 2008.

=C2=A0

But O'Malley, who was jus=
t here a month ago for his introductory visit of the 2016 cycle will return=
this weekend to gain more exposure - and to campaign for Iowa candidates r=
unning for office this fall.

=C2=A0

O'Malley will help raise =
money for Iowa Democrat Jack Hatch, who is challenging Republican Terry Bra=
nstad for the governor's office, as well as for state Sen. Rita Hart of=
Wheatland and for Kevin Kinney, a sheriff's deputy from Johnson County=
who's running for the Iowa Senate this fall. His pending trip was firs=
t reported by Politico.

=C2=A0

In comparison to the traffic =
from the GOP presidential aspirants, Iowa hasn't gotten much attention =
from Democrats who are on the buzz list for 2016. Liberal blogger John Deet=
h keeps a running tally on his website on Clinton's absence; she has sa=
id she is still trying to decide whether to run for president a second time=
.

=C2=A0

U.S. Amy Klobuchar of Minneso=
ta will be back in Iowa on Aug. 23 to campaign for U.S. Senate hopeful Bruc=
e Braley; she was last here in August 2013. U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Ver=
mont, an independent will make his second Iowa visit this year when he hold=
s events in Dubuque on Sept. 13 and in Waterloo and Des Moines on Sept. 14 =
=E2=80=93 the likely weekend of the Harkin Steak Fry. Vice President Joe Bi=
den dropped in on a couple hundred Iowans who were in D.C. for an annual lo=
bbying trip in May, and was last in Iowa for the steak fry in September 201=
3. Former Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer was here in December. And a group o=
f people who claim to be from Iowa are trying to recruit U.S. Sen. Joe Manc=
hin of West Virginia to run for president.

=C2=A0

O'Malley who received a w=
arm welcome from Iowa Democratic activists during a two-day visit a month a=
go. He praised retired U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin at a dinner on June 20, then ga=
ve the keynote speech at the Democrats' state convention on June 21. In=
his speech, orated with the aid of teleprompters, O'Malley offered up =
commentary on his achievements and his belief in the future.

=C2=A0

Linda Langston, who is one of=
Iowa's representatives to the Democratic National Committee, in an int=
erview with the Register last month predicted that Iowans will be intrigued=
by O'Malley. "He's well positioned to run should (Clinton) de=
cide not to run," she said. "And obviously if she does run, she=
39;s got to figure out who she's going to put her on the ticket with he=
r."

=C2=A0

In summer 2012, O'Malley =
courted Iowa activists at the Democratic National Convention in North Carol=
ina, and he was the keynote speaker at U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin's 35th annu=
alsteak fry fundraiser in fall 2012.

[Subtitle:] The movement to elect Elizabeth Warren president is make bel=
ieve.

=C2=A0

DETROIT=E2=80=94Every time sh=
e=E2=80=99s asked, Sen. Elizabeth Warren gives the same frustrated answer. =
No. Nope. She is not running for president. She has literally rolled her ey=
es at the question. She=E2=80=99s offered to =E2=80=9Cadd an exclamation po=
int.=E2=80=9D She=E2=80=99s even signed a letter calling on Hillary Clinton=
, who leads polls of Democrats by up to 50 points, to run for president.

=C2=A0

And yet there they were on Fr=
iday morning, the people who wanted Warren to reconsider. Days before this =
year=E2=80=99s Netroots Nation conference, the annual gathering of the onli=
ne left, an Obama campaign veteran launched a draft campaign called Ready f=
or Warren. (The name is a wink at the pro-Clinton PAC Ready for Hillary, wh=
ich claims to have 2.5 million supporters in its database.) The new group p=
rinted =E2=80=9CWarren for President=E2=80=9D signs and plastered =E2=80=9C=
Warren for President=E2=80=9D stickers on free skimmer hats. As activists e=
ntered the Cobo Center, which resembles a pile of faded Rubik=E2=80=99s Cub=
es that have tumbled from a closet, volunteers handed out the goods. There =
was even a folk song soundtrack, by Jessie Murphy:

We wil=
l need a leader who won=E2=80=99t stand for all the Wall Street bullshit, t=
he lobbyist grifting

=C2=A0

The reluctant hero never stoo=
d a chance. When her applause lines hit, up went the signs.

=C2=A0

=E2=80=9CThe game is rigged,=
=E2=80=9D said Warren toward the end of her remarks. =E2=80=9CWe can whine =
about it, we can whimper about it, or we can fight back. I=E2=80=99m ready =
to fight back. Are you ready to fight back on this?=E2=80=9D

=C2=A0

Up went the signs, up went th=
e chant: =E2=80=9CRun, Liz, Run.=E2=80=9D

But the story was already being told. The signs made it i=
nto write-ups by Politico, Huffington Post, McClatchy, and a Washington Pos=
t story about how =E2=80=9Ccracks are beginning to emerge=E2=80=9D in the C=
linton restoration=E2=80=99s coalition.

=C2=A0

The evidence for a left-wing =
challenge to Clinton that could defeat her is thin to nonexistent. Defeatin=
g Clinton wasn=E2=80=99t even a theme at Netroots Nation, where in 2007 bot=
h Sens. Barack Obama and John Edwards clearly outpaced her in support. Anyo=
ne who could force Clinton to the left=E2=80=94on Wall Street, on bank refo=
rm, on student loans, on inequality=E2=80=94was worth talking about. Not fa=
r from where Warren was speaking, a D.C. activist named Edrie Irvine was sp=
orting a Bernie Sanders for President 2016 shirt, and getting into conversa=
tions that assumed the Vermont senator could never win.

=C2=A0

=E2=80=9CI love my Bernie,=E2=
=80=9D said Irvine. =E2=80=9CI want him to run not because I expect that he=
would ever win, but because he would force the conversation in a direction=
it might not otherwise go.=E2=80=9D

=C2=A0

That=E2=80=99s just it. Progr=
essives want to change the party, which means more than choosing a presiden=
t. (Several Netroots panels featured activists who had moved the Obama admi=
nistration when it was acting too slowly on issues like immigration.) The i=
nstitutions that created the online left were birthed by no-chance campaign=
s. MoveOn was founded in 1998 by Silicon Valley liberals who wanted Congres=
s to stop short of impeaching Bill Clinton. =E2=80=9CCensure,=E2=80=9D it s=
aid, =E2=80=9Cand move on.=E2=80=9D Howard Dean=E2=80=99s 2004 campaign bro=
ught in a young generation of activists and techies, spawning some of the d=
ata and campaign companies that would elect Barack Obama.

=C2=A0

Yet MoveOn lost its first fig=
ht. The Dean campaign lost every major primary. The lesson activists took a=
way: Try something. The media, at least, is going to cover a primary threat=
more than it covers a sui generis student loan bill.

=C2=A0

Thus the Warren =E2=80=9Cpres=
idential campaign,=E2=80=9D a masterful branding and messaging exercise. In=
September 2013, the New York Times wrote an attention-getting profile of W=
arren=E2=80=99s appeal to progressives, proven by the growing crowds for or=
ganizers wise enough to book her. =E2=80=9CBumper stickers and T-shirts sur=
facing in liberal enclaves proclaim, =E2=80=98I=E2=80=99m from the Elizabet=
h Warren Wing of the Democratic Party.=E2=80=99 =E2=80=9D Jonathan Martin r=
eported that those stickers were mass-produced by the Progressive Change Ca=
mpaign Committee, which was founded in 2009 by Adam Green (a veteran of Mov=
eOn and Democratic campaigns) and Stephanie Taylor (a veteran of the SEIU, =
AFL-CIO, and yes, MoveOn).=C2=A0

=C2=A0

In its early years, the PCCC =
confounded Democrats, losing a run of primaries and buying ads to pressure =
red state Senate Democrats who were slow-walking the Affordable Care Act. T=
he Warren brand=E2=80=94earned after the group signed up activists and dono=
rs for her nascent Senate bid=E2=80=94is self-evidently a way to move the c=
onversation, whether or not anyone challenges Clinton. =E2=80=9CWe=E2=80=99=
re going to make sure that every Democrat who runs for president is forced =
to say whether they agree with Elizabeth Warren on key issues,=E2=80=9D Gre=
en told the Boston Globe last year, =E2=80=9Clike expanding Social Security=
benefits and more Wall Street reform.=E2=80=9D

=C2=A0

Green repeated that point at =
the Netroots conference, though he hardly needed to. Rep. Dan Kildee, a fre=
shman Democrat from one of the new safe Michigan districts, said it was =E2=
=80=9Cclear=E2=80=9D that any 2016 candidate had to cop from Warren.

=C2=A0

=E2=80=9CThe basic premise, t=
hat we need to restore some balance in the equation between corporate inter=
ests and consumers=E2=80=94that=E2=80=99s what she=E2=80=99s done for a lon=
g time,=E2=80=9D he said, recalling how he=E2=80=99d cited her when he work=
ed at a think tank. =E2=80=9CMore people should embrace it. It cuts across =
partisan lines. =E2=80=9C

=C2=A0

But he wasn=E2=80=99t calling=
for a primary. The point was getting the next candidate to move where the =
Netroots crowd wanted her to move.

=C2=A0

=E2=80=9CHillary Clinton is g=
oing to say these things,=E2=80=9D said former Rep. Brad Miller, a North Ca=
rolina Democrat who left his seat after a 2011 gerrymander. =E2=80=9CWhoeve=
r our Democratic nominee is will run as an economic populist. When the poll=
sters and consultants come back with the numbers, they=E2=80=99ll tell her:=
Holy crap, you may not have been a populist before, but you are one now! T=
he problem will be credibility, and whether it=E2=80=99s believable coming =
from someone who has close ties to the financial sector.=E2=80=9D

=C2=A0

At the conference, for most a=
ttendees, Clinton was credible enough. A Ready for Hillary organizer pointe=
d out that some of the people who applauded when they saw Warren at a nearb=
y hotel were sporting Hillary gear. There was no mass boycott of the main F=
riday night party, sponsored by Ready for Hillary, held at a downtown music=
venue called St. Andrews, with the PAC=E2=80=99s bus parked right outside.=
As guests arrived, they ran into a table loaded with PAC stickers (=E2=80=
=9CI=E2=80=99m ready for Hillary=E2=80=9D) and the room-filling pop of KGB,=
a Motown cover band.

=C2=A0

Activists born in the 1980s; =
music from the 1960s. Not the ideal metaphor for a Clinton campaign, but it=
got a PCCC leader tweeting that after =E2=80=9Cone more margarita=E2=80=9D=
even he, too, would be ready for the Clintons.

=C2=A0

I didn=E2=80=99t find a true =
Clinton critic, actually, until the next night=E2=80=99s after-party. It wa=
s hosted by the Alliance for American Manufacturing. (In a Saturday speech,=
the labor group=E2=80=99s president, Scott Paul, had told activists to nom=
inate =E2=80=9Ca woman who not only says the right thing but does the right=
thing.=E2=80=9D) At the party, I ran into the last guy who challenged Clin=
ton from the left and lost. Jonathan Tasini, a writer and activist who ran =
against Clinton in the 2006 New York U.S. Senate race, was at least willing=
to muse about one of the progressive branding campaigns turning into an ac=
tual primary.

But how many Democrats? In 20=
06, Tasini asked progressives to hold Clinton accountable for backing the I=
raq War. She won the primary with 83 percent of the vote. And on this parti=
cular Saturday night, the Clinton agita was not too serious. On the way out=
of the party, Scott Paul spotted me and corrected the record on his quote=
=E2=80=94the one absolutely everyone interpreted as a call for Warren to ru=
n.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has =E2=80=9Clost control=E2=
=80=9D of her public Image, a sorry place to be for someone who's repor=
tedly considering a 2016 presidential bid, and she has no one to blame but =
herself, an MSNBC panel suggested Tuesday morning.

=C2=A0

Questions about whether Clint=
on has done irreparable harm to her Image began with "Morning Joe&quot=
; co-host Mika Brzezinski citing a recent Politico survey that shows a majo=
rity of voters disapprove of how the former first lady performed as secreta=
ry of state.

=C2=A0

The poll found that only 14 p=
ercent of voters rate Clinton's performance at state as =E2=80=9Cexcell=
ent,=E2=80=9D while 28 percent rate her performance as =E2=80=9Cgood,=E2=80=
=9D 21 percent rate it as =E2=80=9Cfair=E2=80=9D and 32 percent rate it as =
=E2=80=9Cpoor.=E2=80=9D

=C2=A0

=E2=80=9C[I]t's a major c=
hange from a year-and-a-half ago when the then-secretary of state had a 70 =
percent approval rating,=E2=80=9D Brzezinski said, noting a separate Bloomb=
erg article that reported Clinton has made roughly $12 million since steppi=
ng down from state in February 2013.

=C2=A0

Co-panelist and political ana=
lyst Mark Halperin weighed in on the issue: =E2=80=9CShe has lost control o=
f her public Image. It's the worst thing that can happen to somebody th=
inking of running for president, and it's at a time when she should be =
in command. You know, she had a book tour, she can control the message,=E2=
=80=9D he said.

=C2=A0

=E2=80=9CHer operation is pla=
ying defense on a lot of stories and, again, it's fine. She can recover=
from it. But right now, she has lost control of how people are thinking ab=
out her, how the media is covering her."

=C2=A0

The Clinton machine, for its =
part, claims that much of the negative press surrounding the former secreta=
ry of state is either uninteresting or simply untrue. Meanwhile, Clinton=
9;s tour promoting her new book, Hard Choices, continues apace, providing t=
he media with one wealth-related gaffe after another.

=C2=A0

=E2=80=9CWould it have been b=
etter -- in hindsight -- if Hillary Clinton had not written this book and g=
one on a book tour?=E2=80=9D co-panelist Willie Geist asked. =E2=80=9CBecau=
se look where she was when she was out of the fray: No one was talking abou=
t her in terms of politics, just in terms of how she had done as secretary =
of state.=E2=80=9D